Just over a year after Riverside City Manager John Russo fought to increase your sales taxes and mere days after advocating to raise your utility taxes by increasing rates, on February 6th at 2pm in Council Chambers he’s asking for his payola in the form of a new, 7-year contract from his bosses. And the Bad News Council will probably give it to him as he’s been instrumental in bringing us some of the highest tax and rate increases in the history of Riverside for them to continue to play with…in the name of “public safety and vital services” of course. [snicker, snicker]

We don’t believe most of us would have a problem with a salary increase or extension if he was actually bringing value to his shareholders, or in other words, a savings to the taxpayers, feepayers, ratepayers, etc. Heck, one could make the argument that he might deserve such if he was providing us with better services at the same price to us. Instead, Russo has been increasing all-of-the-above during his tenure to cover-up the poor decisions made by the Bad News Council over the previous decade-or-so, especially concerning unfunded pensions, which are now beyond $600 million in the red. That’s right, since he arrived a mere 3-years ago from his $240+thousand/year salary gig in Alameda (after serious prompting by recently exiled ex-General Manager of Riverside Public Utilities, Girish“Drunk Daddy” Balachandran), you and I are paying higher sales taxes, higher property taxes, higher fees, and soon, if he has his way, higher utility rates. So busy has Russo been playing his role as taxman we wonder where he finds the time to, you know, actually run the city.

So what of this 7-year contract you may ask? For starters, he is asking for a new contract with over 2 years remaining on his current contract! What gives? This brings us to the obvious question, “Why is he asking now, and why would members of the Bad News Council seriously consider it or even agree to it at this time?” Is he planning on breaking his current contract like he previously did in Alameda? If so, and if he gets his new contract, what would prevent him from bolting in a few years anyway, as there are no clawbacks or liquidated damage provisions to ensure he stays? It is clear to us that he thinks he holds all the cards at the moment, or that he’s identified most of our Council as pigeons.

Another pressing question is why does Russo even need a 7-year contract? Our Council can apparently fire him at any time with a 12-month severance payout. Is this an ego thing or is he just striking while the iron’s hot? And why would a Council, full with individuals who may not even be on the dais in less than 4 years, bind the hands of a future Council? So is this another rendition of the Old Man and the Sea of Taxpayer Monies, or is it to further lead us into a California society of To Haves and Have Nots and in doing so run us Across the River and Into the Trees?

CLICK ON IMAGES TO VIEW FULL CONTRACT

Not only is he already one of the highest paid public sector employees in the Inland Empire, he is also the sixth highest salaried city manager in the State, behind only the likes of city managers at Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Santa Ana, and Palm Springs. On top of 3-4% annual raises he requests based off his new $327 thousand/year salary (up from $240k/year just 4 years ago…my-oh-my, aren’t we gracious?), on top of his already-lavish benefit package, he is looking for these non-standard terms in his new deal from the City (aka, us):

He wants us to pay his State Bar dues (though he’s not employed as the City Attorney).

He wants us to provide a 15-year subsidized mortgage on his $675,000 house. So have we become Bank of Riverside?

He wants us to provide him with a 15-year term $700,000.00 life insurance policy. John’s lavish and carefree lifestyle makes life insurance unaffordable?

He wants us to grant him a one-time 7 week vacation bonus. A payola signing bonus laundered as a vacation bonus for assisting Council in securing higher rates and taxes?

He wants us to allow him to have a teaching job on the side. Apparently, he needs to supplement his income and/or network towards his next career opportunity and/or needs intellectual stimulation away from our brain-dead Council.

Of course he also gets:

Fully paid medical, dental and optical for him and his family.

A $500 monthly car allowance.

The biggest laugh is in the City Council Memorandum that states there is “no net cost compared to the current contract provisions” in the new contract…despite all the net costs to his current contract provisions, prepared and approved by his own staff of course. I guess P.T. Barnum said it best, “There’s a sucker born every minute.” Russo seems set to test that theory on at least 4 members of our Council.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

It’s 1 for us, and 1 for him … and 1 for us, and 19 for him. And so who is John Russo reeeeally to the general public? Friend, foe or simply just the taxman…collecting revenue to live the high life himself? Then you got to ask, “What’s with the Hemingway beard?” TMC just wants you to know it’s aging you.

Will the Real Russo please stand up, show your colors and take off your make-up … while we ask the Bad News Council to find some rocks under their belt and tell you to go pound sand.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “REPREHENSIBLE,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “VILE,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “DEFAMATORY,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “OBNOXIOUS,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! YES WE ADMIT WE OUR ALL OF THAT AND MORE, WHICH IN CURRENT TERMS IS KNOWN AS “UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT.” TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONE TWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. … AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! CONTACT US: thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

It’s been three years since this issue first came to the council’s attention.
For the sake of the newest council members, let me recap some background not included in staff report.
As I recall from research three years ago, this property was set aside as park space by the builder of the housing development, down the cul de sac, and across the street back in the 60’s. At some point, apartments were built on both sides of the subject property by a different builder. At some point a single tennis court and basket ball court was built.

It appears the apartment property was sold in 06′, the new owner wanted to refinance in 12′ and discovered they really didn’t own the separate lot containing the tennis/basket ball court. They then approached city staff about obtaining title to this property and staff placed an agenda item before the CC to quit claim title for zero compensation to the city.

Here are some thoughts about this property:
-The tennis court is posted as being only available to residents of the apartment complex and not open to public use. The apartment owner advertises the tennis court and basket ball court as amenities to the tenants.
-As the property is owned by the city of Riverside it is doubtful that property taxes have ever been paid on this property by the apartment owners who are claiming to own it.
– The current and previous owners of the apartment owners have received the benefit of the use of this property for years without legal title or payment of taxes. Local city residents have been denied the use of this property for which the original developer of their tract had dedicated this property to the city for their recreational use.
-If there was a misrepresentation or fraud concerning the ownership of this property, the current owner needs to seek a remedy with the seller of the apartment property, the agents of the seller, and possibly with the title insurance policy every prudent purchaser of real property would obtain. If the current owner failed to do due diligence or purchase title insurance, it is not the responsibility of the city to make them whole.
-City staff appears to have not calculated the loss of property tax of which the city should seek to recapture.
-City staff has not estimated the damages to the city for loss of use.
-It is outrageous that it has ever been considered to gift this property to this private, for profit, investment group, who basically has stolen park land from the city.
-While the current proposal is to sell the property for $5K, it is still insulting. The apartment owners want to claim they made $35k in improvements to the property, but they have had all the tax free benefits of the use of that property for years.
-It’s upsetting that the city, upon discovering this ownership problem three years ago, didn’t attempt to compel the apartment owners into a month to month rental agreement, so as to reassert the city’s ownership and gain compensation for use of public property.
-There is a shortage of public tennis courts and parkland in the city of Riverside. Certainly, the city should be trying to recover enough funds from the sale of this property to replicate the resource to the benefit of the community it was originally intended, in a different location.
-If this property is to be disposed, it should be offered as a open bid. I belong to a public non-profit who would be willing to bid on this property. Perhaps that would be a fair way of establishing market value.

Site photos below.

Respectfully,
Kevin Dawson
ward two
Riverside CA

CLICK ON PHOTOS TO ENLARGE

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S REGIONAL COUNTIES MOST, “NEGATIVE,” “RAUNCHY,” “LOW CLASS,” “VISIONS OF GRANDEUR,” “FULL OF B.S.,” “IGNORANT,” “MISGUIDED,” “BULLYISH,” “FILTHY,” “SICK,” “PERVERTED,” “STUPID,” “PATHETIC,” “DESPICABLE,” “DISAPPOINTING,” “BELOW THE BELT,” “A NEW LOW,” “SHOCKING,” “OFFENSIVE,” “INAPPROPRIATE,” “HURTFUL,” “MEAN SPIRITED,” “DISTASTEFUL,” “EMBARRASSING,” HORIFFIC,” “SLANDEROUS” “FIT TO BE VIEWED FROM THE REAR” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO THE ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVLY EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (WE BELIEVE THIS WILL END SOON, SINCE THE FOCUS IS NOW ON THE IMPROPRIETIES OF MR. “Z”. WE TRIED TO TELL YOU, BUT NOBODY LISTENED), AND DON’T FORGET WE ARE PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… A STRATEGIC LEGAL MANEUVER THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IN RIVERSIDE WITHOUT A CONTRACT… AGAIN, THANK YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

On June 25, 2013 at City Council in the City of Riverside, Letitia Pepper, Esq., former Best, Best & Krieger Attorney, was arrested for clapping in approval of statements made by public speakers. If you recall, public speaker Karen Wright was arrested last November 2012 for speaking 16.8 seconds over the 3 minute rule. Mike Fine, Deputy Superintendent of RUSD, went over the 3 minute with no provocation or arrest by the mayor.. Regardless, Mayor William Rusty Bailey, as an audience member coined, “Lil Hitler”, felt strongly enough to sign the citizen’s arrest form that activated the arrest of Ms. Pepper. Bailey, a government teacher, should know the constructs of the First Amendment, otherwise, what was he teaching his students? A little power can certainly make you forget that you are there to serve the public.

Once she was arrested and removed from council chambers, the audience responded with clapping in support of Ms. Pepper. Was her First Amendment right of free speech impinged? It is likely that this could be explored in a law suit against the City of Riverside. What will clammed up City Attorney Gregory Priamos have to say about this? Well he’s pretty much saying nothing about nothing these days..

So why is Bailey clapping in approval without being arrested? Has he now become the decider? What will King Bailey do next? Send the masses of clappers to internment camps?

Ten days ago this document was handed to Mayor Bailey in demand for a public apology for unlawful and discourteous actions at Council Chambers June 11, 2013. Ms. Pepper was representing three citizens, Vivian Moreno, Joel Udayke and Dvonne Pitruzzello regarding his position on no applauding during public comment. Was this in fact, a personal vendetta against former BB&K Attorney, Letitia Pepper by Mayor Bailey? Why was Ms. Pepper targeted for removal and arrest my Mayor Rusty Bailey, when there were multiply clappers? Why weren’t the other clapppers removed and arrested? Is this the Mayor’s attempt to control public participation in government? Is the arrest a show of force in an attempt to initimidate the public not to participate in government? Currently the Mayor Bailey has passed the 10 day response time. We’ve yet to hear of a statement from Mayor Bailey or even the clammed up in his office City Attorney Gregory Priamos. But is there more to Priamos’s life than we know? More to come on TMC..

THE CITATION (CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

But I guess the questions many are asking these days, even those who voted for Rusty, what is he doing? Again as many residents have said, they feel the city will retaliate against them if something derrogatory is said regarding city politics. So why is it? Many are asking, is it because of the history of Rivserside, whereby a conglomerate of politically tied families made the rules and the basis for politics in the City of Riverside? Which of course includes the Bailey family. You have Mayor William Rusty Bailey’s father judge and then you have the fathers friend who was a founder of incidently, Best, Best & Krieger. Halleluah, are we actually coming to anwers of why the City of Riverside is the way that it is politically?

Judge John Gabbert, in younger days, a Quandrangle of Influence within the City of Riverside? What is the connection between Best, Best & Krieger and the City of Riverside? What is taking that hold on Riverside that has everything to do with old family influences? You get my drift, I wouldn’t attempt to try this case on the constitutionality of ‘clapping’ within the City of Riverside.

Will Zellerbach do anything about this? According to his campaign contributions, I guess not..

One homeless person was seen doing laundry in the water pool in front of City Hall on June 25, 2013.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. NOW TAGGED LOCAL BLOGGERS OR LOCAL MEDIA? RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

UPDATE: 11/02/2012: ACCORDING TO CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS RESPONSE STATEMENT REGARDING THE ARREST OF PUBLIC SPEAKER KAREN WRIGHT WHEN ASKED TO RESPOND. HIS RESPONSE, WAS “ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILIGE”, MEANING THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, HE IS REPRESENTING SOMEONE OTHER THATN HIMSELF. TECHNICALLY THIS WOULD BE THE MAYOR AND/OR COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL DENIES KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, DID PRIAMOS’S ORDERS OR DIRECTIVES THEN CAME FROM THE MAYOR? WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE WHEN WE FIRST PRACTICE TO DECEIVE..

UPDATE: 11/01/2012: OFFICER SAHAGUN’S POLICE REPORT SUGGEST THAT WRIGHT WAS SINGLED OUT BY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS IF HE IN FACT ACTED ALONE. PRIAMOS’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION UP ON NOVEMBER 13, 2012.. In this article, Councilman Gardner continues to amaze the intelligent community by standing by his rendition of events in the course of Ms. Wright. The officer took her elbow as if to guide her away from the lectern; he didn’t grab her or throw her to the floor, Gardner said. It appeared she sat down on the floor or lost her balance and fell. When will the lying end, is this what the constiuents “have to put up with?” Ooops, I believe I’ve heard this comment before..

Yes, Coucilman Gardner, that’s exactly what we saw, gently taking her elbow as to guide her away, possibly to help her find her way back to her seat, afterall she is disabled…then suddenly, she decided to sit on the floor, possibly just to relax a minute… Incidently, Gardner had front seats on the dais for this grand event, and he called it as seen it. In another statement in the PE, Gardner emphatically seems to say that Priamos would not over step his authority without the go ahead from the mayor or council. I could certainly interpret this statement as meaning, no move can be made by the City Attorney without the Council or Mayor. Could we now say that Primos was the messenger, and therefore council and/or mayor knew about it? What ever the truth may be, Gardner has either lost touch, or is truly telling the truth regarding what actually happened. In telling the truth, Council and/or Mayor knew….Is a recall in order for those involved?

UPDATE: 10/31/2012: EVENING: THE QUESTION OF GOING ROGUE..

In the Press Enterprise, Loveridge said he did not know whether Priamos had a conversation with the Officer Nick Sahagun. Maintaining decorum is the call of elected officials, not city staff! He evidently went on to say that “I need to talk to Greg to find out what was said or not said.” Is Mayor Luv stating Priamos made this decision on his own. After all, according to former employees, Priamos has been known to call Council members “idiot’s” within his circle. So how do they expect anyone to follow the rules of decorum when they do not follow the rules themselves, further, even the laws of the State of California. Four weeks ago, City Attorney Gregory Priamos conducted a two hour ethics training course to the Council. But was this really a “Bonehead Course”, as Dan Berstein coined. Maybe there is an emphasis in “How not to get caught”. At any rate it is quite a surprise to the community knowing Priamos’s track record.

This is quite disturbing because we currently have a City Attorney who has decided to give a directive of enforcement upon a citizen via a police officer. If in fact, the directive was solely his decision, and not one to involve the Mayor, would he be consider “rogue?”

According to the PE, City Attorney Gregory Priamos appreared surprised that the police report was had been made public. Though he had yet to read the report, he stated that Officer Sahagun’s description of the conversation was inaccurate. He declined to elaborate further, and cited attorney-client privilege. Attorney-Client Privilege? We understand he is Privileged, but who’s the Attorney and who’s the Client Gregory? Technically, the taxpayer is the client and he, Priamos, the attorney on record to protect us.

Maybe just a another nervous search for syllables, or it could have been a little gas from a bad burrito.. But is City Attorney Greg Priamos basically calling Officer Nick Sahagun a “liar?” Again, while the Council and Mayor were stating that Ms. Wright was arrested for not obeying an officer, according to Officer Sahagun, that was not so.

Did the directive come from the Mayor? Two days after the arrest, a new so called protocol was implemented. This would now give authority to the meeting chair, being either the Mayor Pro Tem or the Mayor himself to give the order to remove someone from the podium. But these rules have already been in place, was this a scuffle to spin? Back in 2006, an 89 year old woman, Marjorie Von Pohle, was removed from the podium by the directive of a Mayor Pro Tem to an RPD Officer for exceeding the 3 minute rule. Ms. Wright is scheduled to appear in Superior Court on December 27, 2012. Some rumors down the information pipeline is “Allred.”

It comes as a shock to TMC to see public speaking come to this. Other’s are telling me that I’m just naive, “this is Riverside”.. What a night, one disabled elderly female public speaker down and arrested, a second disabled elderly female skirted with the possibility of second taken down, then one Councilman’s Aide is seen by another female speaker with his middle finger across his face. This public speaker had just commented on the inappropriate behavior of this aide, especially toward females. Karen Wright, a 60 year old disabled public speaker icon, went over the three minute mark, approximately 16.8 seconds. Returning to her seat, she was met with one of Ronnie’s Bouncer’s. Midway from her seat, when she turned toward the council, she was pushed by the officer. When she arrived at her seat, she was getting some of her things, the officer inadvertently came from the right side, it appeared he wasn’t finished with her, and then grabbed her arm, turned it clockwise, whereby she could not nothing other than fall and and take her down to the floor, she fell seated, she then took her two hands to try to get up as she indicated, but was pushed by her right hand taken, then handcuffed. Not one, not two but three RPD officers surrounded her when she was on the floor. “Officer, you are making me naked.” she stated. A disgusting act of use of force, but Riverside has a track record of this, and a double standard when it comes to arrest. You might think this is Afghanistan or Iraq, unfortunately this is Riverside, specifically, regarding these current state of affairs, I must say, the City of Riverside.. So, if you live here, you msut exactly know what this blogger is talking about..

The first quickly came out of nowhere, as she turned after finishing her point after the three minute mark, she was met with officer, not regularly seen, who grabbed her and threw her to the floor as seen in the images. While the council just sat there stonefaced, as good leaders do. While one retired police officer, later stated to TMC who saw the video from home, “there was no reason for this officer to touch this person.” So again, why would this Mayor, this Mayor known as Mayor Ron Loveridge allow this? Later in City Council, Mayor Loveridge stated, “this is outrageous behavior”, when Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Council Aide, Chuck Condur, used a derrogatory finger symbol toward public speaker Dvonne Pitruzzello during council sessions. Why didn’t the Mayor have the gumption to say the same? Did he enjoy this? Did he allow this for personal reasons against Wright, being approximately his last appearance as Mayor on the dais? If there is a story, let’s hear it, this is not the normal standard behavior of a RPD officer at City Council.. Give us your side anonymously at thirtymilescorruption@hotmail.com

During this disgusting act of force, Councilwoman Nancy Hart, Councilman Steve Adams (also a former police officer), and Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey left their council seats and exited the dais. It appeared they themselve could not handle or stomach the scene. But non of these great leaders said, enough! This has to stop! A reflection of the leadership in Riverside. Well anyway, this is what happens if you talk a good 25 seconds after the 3 minute mark. You may find a couple of RPD on your back.. Being disabled that’s gotta hurt.. After this disruption by Ronnie’s Bouncers, she was later taken outside, released and issued a citation for “disruption of a public event.” The witnesses who were there were stating, “she was already returning to her seat!” RPD Officer you shouldn’t have done it, you’ve watched over the security of Council meetings before. This is behavior unlike you, were you briefed by Council, Mayor, City Execs, City Attorney or your superiors to do this, and target this specific public speaker? More information coming down the pipeline..

The Chief then called Ms. Wright a “a horrible person”, “your disrespectful” and “You hate the police!” At the time he also turned to then Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello and stated, “I don’t like her!” This all occurred in a public arena. Chief Diaz has yet to publicly apologize for, as Mayor Loveridger would say, “this is outrageous behavior!” Though Karen had the right to file an ethics complaint on this very issue, she chose at the time not do so. Chief Diaz should be thankful of this. Many are saying should we disband RPD? And just go with Riverside County Sheriff, would this make a difference?

Notice the empty seat behind above the left officer, Councilman and Mayoral Candidate Rusty Bailey left the dais, out of sight.. Some commenters on the Press Enterprise have begin coin Councilman and Mayoral Candidate… “Runaway Rusty.”

Wrong Councilman Davis, she picked her own self up according to the above video. Let’s not begin to spin the chain of events in order to defend you and the council bullies, that night, for not doing the right thing and stopping what occurred. You stated that the decision for this is defined by the RPD officer, and by “law” you cannot interfere with that. But now, new rules? “Police Officers will now be directed by the Mayor?” according to the the Press Enterprise. Now, elected officials can interfere with the actions of the Police Officers? But some Council members are saying, again, as an authority figures, and I disagree with that, that they cannot interfere with the judgement of a an RPD officer? You work for us, and we expect some aggregious behavior to be stopped by a police officer, but you are telling them you have no power. Our we living in a microcosm of a police state?

To the elected individuals on the dais, we’ve have not declared war..we only want transparency…

“At that time she also decided to sit down, on the floor, just outside the Dais entrance door and near her seat, with her hands not visible from my vantage point.”

Councilman Davis, you are wrong again, let me show how she ended up on the floor. You call us “crazy”, but at least we are not “liars.” This is how Ms. Wright decided to to sit down..of course, according to Councilman Paul Davis’s innacturate rendition of the Council events..

So what happens next, the Officer says we are done. So what happens with the legal process for Ms. Wright next? When the interrelationdships and interconnections with the City, City Attorney, the Riverside Judges, the District Attorney Paul Zellerbach, the Riverside Grand Jury, even unfortunately to the extent of the State of California Attorney General’s interrelationship? What will happen to this poor disabled 60 year old elderly woman? Well it’s already been decided if you live in Riverside. Some call it politics, some just have to accept it..

“All I was told was that you are given a certain amount of time to make statements to the council and she went over her time,” Lt. Guy Toussaint said. “She was asked to leave and she refused to do so.” Again wrong, Ms. Wright closed her comments and was on her way to her seat. But what the L.A. Times has right, is that this was all about the 3 minute time limit, which the City denies was a factor in her arrest. Many of the Councilpeople on the dais, who did nothing, and maintained they could not interfere with a police officer. So who’s in charge? Some on the dais, even said in some ways, that “she’d had it coming.” Other’s on the dais, who were criticized, said, “how come those citizens in the audience do nothing?” This is what we have, and you now begin to see the picture unfold before your eyes in relation to political conundrums withing the politics of the City of Riverside.

Again it didn’t stop there, another disabled individual on crutches …What is it with the City of Riverside and disabled females? What is it with leadership that doesn’t have the guts to lead and come out to say this is wrong. Is it easier say that the individuals are just “crazy?” Well Dvonne Pitruzzello said it best when she said, “I rather be called crazy, then to be a crook.” Well anyway this person below was on crutches and the same RPD officer started to walk down toward the podium again… Ren Holmstrum on crutches was subjected to a possible throwdown, regarding her issue of Riverside hospice, when she went over the three minute mark.. One of RPD officers was again on alert, walking down the isle again to take care of muni mafia business…

Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey seen with his head down in the video. Last week Councilman and Mayoral Candidate William “Rusty” Bailey, came to the TMC site to inadvertently download photos of his Mayoral opponent and former Riverside Councilman, Ed Adkison, of course without TMC’s permission. These were then sent city wide in a campaign mailer. Now RPD wants TMC’s photos of the Council Debacle…Many in the community, seeing this display of police are now afraid, who can we depend on when we cannot trust our own community police force? Who do we call when we cannot call our own police force for help? Questions some community constituents are asking. This is the same behavior community constituents have been talking about to their city leaders for years…

Other’s are asking the question if this was a set up.. Most often, RPD or Ronnie’s Bouncers are cordial, escorting the “3 minute violator” back to their seat. This time, the Mayor meant business, it was a throw down… Was this orchestrated and planned by the mayor, the puller of strings? As one reporter stated on Channel 11 News on 10/25/2012 “She must have gotten under somebody’s skin.” This because Ms. Wright goes to each and every council meeting to comment on issues, and is therefore well known..

“I want to live in a society that people can voice unpopular opinions because I know as result of that a society grows and matures,” – Hugh Hefner

From the current contact in the mainstream media, much is being said, many questions asked, pieces of the puzzle that just don’t make sense, but the questions of why none of the City Council leadership said nothing, allowed the activity to happen, and simply found it acceptable.. again actions speak louder than words..

The question to the council by Pitruzzello was, ” Why Condor wasn’t arrested, or a police report created by Bailey’s Aide, Mark Earley? We just don’t know..”Was this a concerted effort by City Hall to cover up the alleged altercation back in April 2012?” Regardless, it still didn’t stop there! As Former Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello walked toward the back of Council Chambers she was met from a distance, Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s Aide, Chuck Condor, placing the “middle finger” in front of his face toward Pitruzzello. Mrs. Pitruzzello interrupted the City Council to let them know just what happened. The following pics below taken at the time of the interruption. The shock was written all over Councilwoman Nancy Hart’s face. Officer Nick, again, one of Ronnie”s Bouncer’s pounced on the situation and begin to walk over toward Pitruzzello. She let Officer Nick know, “that’s who you need to arrest!” Referring to Mac Arthur’s Council Aide Chuck Condur. This is the one time TMC agrees with Mayor Luv when he stated, “this is outrageous behavior.” When a Council Aide can continually get away with derrogatory remarks and alleged actions, this is outrageous behavior.. This Public Council Meeting could not have been hotter…

But let’s not forget this is Riverside, Chuck Condor, may just get a monetary raise and become an elected official one day.. But many are asking the question, why does Councilman Chris Mac Arthur allow a person such as Chuck, who appears to be a loose cannnon, on his team? Another liability? Could revealers of Condur’s behavior now be in danger of retaliation by the City of Riverside Power House? Will have to ask Councilman Chris Mac Arthur who has protected his aide through thick and thin regardless of his derrogatory behavior. The question is, does the Community concur with this type of legislative aid behavior?

UPDATE:10/29/2012: A MONTAGE OF COMMENTERS COMMENTING ON THIS ISSUE REGARDING MS. KAREN WRIGHT FROM THE PE BEFORE THEY ARE DELETED…POSSIBLY BY SOME DIRECTIVE BY A CITY ELECT OR THE CHIEF OF POLICE HIMSELF…

Remember folks, you have to be in a bad mood as a citizen when you come to City Council Meetings when you know that you the taxpayer, are $4 billion in debt, and that you the taxpayer are responsible for it as a result of the elected officials who voted on these issues.

This is ridiculous. Going over the time limit is not a crime. I’m not a fan of Karen’s, but she had finished talking and was walking away from the podium. Someone has it in for her, and that’s not right. Terrible, terrible showing by the police, the mayor, and the council. -Kaptalism, commenter on the PE

This makes me SICK! Sooooo unjustified! This isn’t the last we have heard of this, believe it! A lawsuit will be forthcoming for SURE! So shameful! -Nettie Nettie Bobettie, commenter on the PE

Unbelievable~!!! They should be ashamed of themselves~!!!! – Alice Wersky Naranjo, commenter on the PE

AND THIS MORNINGWE ARE ON FOX NEWS. AREN’T WE GREAT? –Ron Rose, commenter on the PE

This is how it works at Casa Loveridge. You get three minutes to speak. If you’re kissing his butt, make it four and you can bring about 20 other people up to keep the love flowing longer. If you’re a guy criticizing, he starts to cut in and the hand goes up at about 2:45 into your comment and its purpose is to try to distract you into disagreeing with him over your time is up until it’s up and you don’t talk about your original topic. If you’re a woman, alas the infamous hand goes up at about 2:30. Bring a timer and time the speakers and the Loveridge hand wave yourself a couple times. I’ve done it myself. Very illuminating. The county board of supervisors have used the same tactics for years and rumor has it he wants Tavaglione’s seat if that guy wins the congressional race. So maybe he’s practicing for the bigger stage? If he doesn’t like what you’re saying, apparently…well there’s that too. – Mary Shelton, commenter on the PE.

The cop was not timing her I would bet. He was instructed to do as he did when the time-up signal was given. Minor petty politicians begin to think they are Lords. -James Overturf, commenter on the PE.

Too bad we don’t limit politicians to three minutes of speaking. – BJ Clinton, commenter on the PE.

Although I haven’t lived in Riverside since my Divorce in 2003, I still follow the news. Here are my thoughts:Everyone has a right to voice their opinion in a Public Forum. Time limits are made to provide equal time for all and show some dignity and respect for the Counsel and “Elected Officials” of the Counsel during such meetings. Three (3) minutes may not be enough for some however, if you come prepared to make your point clear and brief, three (3) is “normally” plenty of time. Handcuffing anyone with a strong opinion should not be the norm. This lady was no threat to the counsel or anyone else. The lady only spoke too long. Handcuffs would not have been my first choice to resolve the issue. BAD CALL… Counsel BAD CALL… Riverside Cops -Roy Robinson, commenter on the PE.

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. RATED ONETWO ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

While the City scrambles, TMC’s truth squad, oops, that’s the City’s tag line, has been blogging, reporting and speaking at Council Meetings as to why the Council should not have passed certain loans. In addition, how passing these loans will come back to hurt the tax paying constituents. The states silver bullet of termination appeared to be the only answer. Now 10% of those Enforceable Obligations submitted to the State Finance Department were rejected for not following state guidelines. Enforceable Obligations are legal contracts which declare that one person or agency owes another. The question being asked is were these filing discrepancies inadvertainly overlooked by our protector of citizens, City Attorney Gregory Priamos? And even their hired hand, Best, Best & Krieger? Could these discrepancies possibly be considered faulty legal advice? The City of Riverside shot back at the State Finance Department with the following letter.According to the latest Press Enterprise the City Manager Scott Barber is defending some of the debt.

In the response letter sent back to the State Finance Department by City Manager Scott Barber, he then agreed with the State on the following two items which could not be considered Enforceable Obligations. But shouldn’t the City’s legal council, Riverside City Attorney Gregory Priamos, have been able to clear this question of what is enforceable and what is not?

What is really disturbing in the letter is that Mr. Barber states there are three items of concern that can give way to a rate payer lawsuit. This in response if the State is unable to accept the debt, it will go to Riverside residents in the form of higher utility rates. But in doing so, these would in essence be a violation of proposition 218. These are Page 1, Line Item 29 ($4,329,897.60), Page 1, Line Item 30 ($328,039.22) and Page1, Line Item 32 ($4,793,600.00). Which amounts to $9,451,536.85.

Self Appointed Citizen Auditor, Vivian Moreno, emailed the following letter to Vicki Hightower of the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office indicating our frustration with the use of local resources. The letter was also read to the Council and Mayor at the April 25, 2012 public comment section in council chambers.

What people need to know about the relationship between the Redevelopment Agency and the City of Riverside, is that Redevelopment Agency is a state agency. The agency board is made up of your own city council, mayor and employees of the city’s development department. The City and Redevelopment are one in the same, they just change hats. Ultimately, they are responsible for all actions and decisions.

The Oversight Board or Succesor Agency, with John Tavaglione and Mayor Ron Loveridge on the sidelines appeared to approve all the obligations for the former RDA and thought they could pull the rug over on the State Finance Department. The City and the Oversight Board sent the state a list of obligations they said were allowed and should be paid under the 2011 law that dissolved redevelopment agencies. The Oversight Board in itself was filled with conflicts of interest, and they obviously acted accordingly and expectably. The state then enforced its own pre-released guidelines, and rejected particular line items accordingly. State officials disagreed with a number of items on the list, including construction contracts for the new downtown fire station, Municipal Auditorium and Doty-Trust Park, as well as a disputed amount of loans from the city to the redevelopment agency and nearly $18 million from bonds issued in 2007 that the state says should not be spent. The City of Riverside took offense, and threatened litigation, well Gregory did, possibly by default.

In response to the State Finance Department rejection letter, City Manager Scott Barber will now send the state a response letter early this week, while Mayor Ron Loveridge will follow up with a trip in person to Sacramento. This will turn into a grand event by having his lobbying group, the League of Cities, behind him?

City Attorney Gregory Priamos stated, “We’re confident that by continuing to engage in a serious dialogue with the Department of Finance that we’re going to solve these issues without the need for litigation.”

But to even think that the city attorney would threaten the state with costly taxpayer litigation without considering the guidelines the state implemented, would be considered political suicide. Especially in a time when the city has less of a revenue stream, but not the city attorney’s office it seems. But of course, this is an office which operates without transperancy and without the duty to divulge expenses to the public, of which the public are entitled to. Many constituents in the City of Riverside are telling TMC that they are questioning Greg Priamos’s abilities and practices, which do not appear to be truly protective of our local constituents interest.

According to the letter sent to the City of Riverside by the State of California Finance Department the state says no to approximately 10% of the submissions, while the City of Riverside of course, as we are now aware, threatens litigation. What the State is saying is that Enforceable Obligations (EO), of which the State cites HSC section 34171 (d) , declares in part that Enforceable Obligations do not include any 1. Agreements, 2. Contracts or 3. Arrangements with City (that created the Redevelopment Agency), and especially the Redevelopment Agency itself. So it appears that the City and the Redevelopment Agency entered into multiple loan agreements. The law appears to be very clear, I’m not sure what part Gregory, our City Attorney and Best, Best & Krieger didn’t quite get? I know that they are both sharp cookies and it would appear to me that they wouldn’t allow the city to submit erroneous paperwork purposely. But what do I know, I’m only a common citizen..

But let’s go a little further down. The State considers the following not EO’s. You cannot make inter agency loans and that’s what the TMC truth team has been trying to tell the Mayor and the City Council. Did the city’s lobbying group The League of California Cities say this was legal.? Did the Greater Riverside Chamber say it was legal? Did our City Attorney Gregory Priamos say it was legal. Did Best Best & Krieger, the City’s hired law firm, say it was legal?

There were loans between RDA and the City totaling $41.3 million. There was a cooperative and an agreement between RDA and the City totaling $61.2 million. There was a loan between RDA and the City Housing Authority totaling $1 million. So far $103.4 million total

Then there was an unused revolving line of credit for $19.9 million. Again it remained unused, but the City still tried to push this through for payment regardless. The State said no, it’s not EO’s. New total is $123.3 million.

There are contracts with the city with other entities, not RDA, that the City tried to pass to the state as a Redevelopment issue for $19.9 million. It said no, these are not EO’s. New total, $143.2 million.

There was various expenditures with no expenditure contracts, similar to how the City handles business with BB&K, with no contracts. The state said no, this amounted to $15.4 million. New total, $158.6 million.

So for now, the City of Riverside claims victim status, blaming the state for themselves over extending the city’s finances. We all know that the City is in denial, they will never admit fault, and will not take a bit of responsibility for their past voting record as they should. Continuing to blame the State Finance Department for themselves incurring our $2 billion in Redevelopment debt, and of course, the constituents of this city will ultimately be responsible for the debt. We must also not forget those who were in charge at the time of these occurrences, such as Former Chief Financial Officer/ Assistant City Manager/ Treasurer Paul Sundeen.

The truth of the matter is that the city can only ‘cry wolf’ a limited amount of times, before the residents of this community realize what they have done. But in all fareness we must allow the city’s newly formed “truth squad” to respond to this conundrum, and we will wait to hear from them.

It is now time time to ask the Public Works Director the question the constituents have been waiting to ask, with regards to bids, contracts, change orders and accountability of which he has taken part of .

UPDATE: 06/01/2012: STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SEND LETTER OF APPROVAL TO CITY OF RIVERSIDE ALLOWING COVERAGE OF $26 MILLION OF THE ORIGINAL $156 MILLION ORIGINALLY REJECTED. CURRENTLY, APPROXIMATELY $133 MILLION IS UNACCEPTABLE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND REMAINS A DEBT OF THE CITY.

WHAT WOULD JOE ISUZU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ALL THIS?

UPDATE:04/23/2012: CITY HALL SCUFFLE? Info has been brought to TMC that Councilman Chris Mac Arthur’s aid Chuck Condor was allegedly involved in a scuffle with another individual at City Hall. Condor has been called on the carpet of City Hall for making derogatory remarks such as calling woman commenters “bitches” and “idiots.” This was done in plain sight of others at city meetings. Is Condor out of control? Or is this an accepted part of City Hall culture? TMC has been told Chuck Condor is now on administrative leave, ‘paid leave’? That we do not know. Is Chuck Condor going to lawyer up?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TEMPORARILY BLOCKED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES WITHIN THE CITY, THEN UNBLOCKED. I GUESS YOU CANNOT DO THAT ACCORDING TO ACLU. RATED ONE TWO STAR OUT OF FIVE IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY APPROVAL RATINGS.. TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREGORY ABOUT THAT ONE ( OUR PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO CONTACT HIS PEOPLE)… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

No doubt, Interum Public Works Director Tom Boyd maybe the focus of the John Chiang’s auditing teams hard lined questions. and no doubt, former Public Works Director Siobhan Foster is also looking from the sidelines after leaving her Riverside position in a rush for the same position for the City of Pasadena, a much furthercommute away from home. Did she know anything of the second coming?

DON’T MISS CANDIDATE FOR MAYOR, DVONNE PITRUZELLO AND SELF APPOINTED CITY AUDITOR VIVIAN MORENO WILL BE GIVING CITY COUNCIL A MATH LESSON! FORMER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY RAYCHELE STERLING WILL BE TALKING ABOUT HOW HUMAN RESOURCES TERRORIZES THEIR EMPLOYEES BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN PARANOIA. TONIGHT AT 6:30 PM!

Item #2 is a big concern with the taxpaying residents of the City of Riverside. The city doesn’t have all the money for the park, it therefore will be encumbering our six of the taxpayer fire stations for collateral against a $4 million dollar loan. The six are as follows: Fire Station 2- Arlington, Fire Station 3- Magnolia Center, Fire Station 4- University, Fire Station 8- La Sierra, Fire Station 11-Orange Crest , and Fire Station 12- La Sierra South. The city not to long ago encumbered Fire Station 13- Sycamore Canyon, Fire Station 14- Canyon Crest and two libraries: Casa Blanca and Arlington to use as collateral for monies that found it’s way to the devlopers of the Hyatt Hotel. Now regarding the six fire stations, the finance company, Pinnacle Public Finance, Inc., states that the aggregate value of the fire statios is valued slightly over $4 million, and that is the reason for the need of six stations. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but if you divide $4 million by 6 you get $666,666.66. A possible sign or just a coincidence? Regardless, the median value of each fire station. Pinnacle Public Finance must feel their is risk with this loan to the city, because sources state that the actual cost to build a fire station can run from $9 to $10 million. The estimated cost to build the Downtown Fire Station #1, is $11,246,872.00. Fire Station #14-Canyon Crest which was completed in 2007 costed $4,812,684.00 for one fire station , which contradicts the assessment of 4 million for all six. Is anybody out there experienceing a conniption fit just yet?

So, are we placing approximately $24,000,000.00 to $50,000,000.00 in fire stations for a $4,000,000.00 loan? More salt on the wound, the city’s finance team for this project includes Best, Best & Krieger. Now when this is all over, we will probably have to encumber another 6 fire stations (if we have any left) to pay their bill, since it’s the cities practice not to use contracts with them. Mad yet? The cities annual payment or debt cost will be close to $468,000.00 per year from the General Fund for 10 years. At the end of that 10 years the city will have paid out $671,150.40 in interest alone. That means that could effect police or fire department payroll. But it must not matter in lieu of the mayor’s staff receiving 15% raises. Now nothing is free, so will the city make up the slack in higher taxes, or revenue enhancers such as service or violation fees? Further, Chief Financial Officer Paul Sundeen’s name is not on any of these documents! By the way where is Paul!

So far it is estimated that Tequesquite Park will cost $10.1 million. The city already had $2 million to cover the design cost and environmental and conservation fees, The other $4.1 million would come from municipal debt that the city issued in 2008. Therefore, $4 million is needed to complete the project, which will be paid back over a term of 10 years. In terms of the next 10 years, the total cost from the City’s General Fund each year will be $804,000.00 That’s the cost of park maintenance $336,000 plus the loan payment including interest of $468,000.00

ITEM #20, ITEMS #21 and ITEM #22, the initiations of Landscape Maintenance Districts, where by an annual process of leyving special assessments pertaining to landscape maintenance. This cost of maintaining landscaping will assessed to property owners, as if you don’t have enough taxes to worry about. Dear City of Riveside, don’t we already pay for landscape maintenance in the form of property taxes? Another example of over taxation or double taxation without representation.. But this whole process brings back an old city favorite Albert Webb. Back in 2008, the Albert Webb company was paid 12 seperate payouts all in one day. Question abound, regarding this event.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

HOLDING TRUE TO HIS MISSION STATEMENT: The mission of the City Attorney’s Office is to provide excellent and ethical legal advice, effective legal representation, and other quality legal services for the City Council, City officers, and City employees in order that they may lawfully attain the City Council’s goals and other department program outcomes without undue risk to the City? DO YOU SEE TAXPAYER OR CITIZEN OF THE RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY MENTIONED? AFTERALL, IF YOU ARE PAYING THE BILL SHOULDN’T YOU, THE TAXPAYER, BE PROTECTED?

Evening session was attended by Tom Boyd Interium Public Works Director, no sign of Paul Sundeen since he was last seen leaving mid day from city hall. Councilman Steve Adams was not seen either. TMC had their protest signs with sticks attached to them, some of them pointed. A plains clothes officer was called in by City Attorney Gregory Priamos. When the officer approached Gregory, Gregory said “over there”! The plain clothes officer looked over to us and went to the back of City Council Hall. As the group was leaving and exiting the hall, he later told our group that he was told by Gregory to come in an remove the protesters, because some of the signs had points. That would be considered a “weapon”. In this officers opinion he was just not going to do that. Possibly because it’s appearance was “frivolous”, much as some of Gregory’s law suits. In particular, Ms. Doreen Johnson. Evidently, the Johnson’s own a commercial building and leased property to someone who opened a marijuana dispensary and was then closed and a law suit ensued with their name on it.

It appears if anyone is doing drug business on a property you own, they the feds can take it away from you under asset forfeiture. Others our stating that Ms. Johnson’s property is coincidently across the street from a developers property that has done many projects for the city. But these projects have been in questioned regarding their public benefit. Originally, the true intentions of ‘asset forfeiture laws’ were to hit drug dealers by taking their expensive homes, pimped out vehicles, jewelry and luxury items attained and purchased with drug monies etc. This would occur after their arrest. It currently appears the City Attorney is stretching it to include innocent property owners. Whats really egregious is that they are using three BB&K attorney’s at taxpayer expense, with a cost of $300 to $400 an hour each to go against this business owner. According to Johnson, she was voted on by Priamos and the City as a public nuisance, violating zoning codes, and as she states has been slandered as ‘drug dealer’. Even though the City Attorney serves at the pleasure of the City Council and the Mayor, nothing is said. Does our leadership care or even know the laws? Or our just banking that the advice given by city attorney Gregory Primos is solid and true? Does our leadership even have the background to contradict him? So under Federal asset forfeiture law,even if you loan your car to a friend, and that friend makes a drug deal with the use of your vehicle, they can take your vehicle. It’s a true stretch from the original intentions but something the Johnson’s should inquire with the State Attorney General or Federal Department of Justice. Where was Gregory when some of the City Council and Management were driving illegal cold plate vehicles, or where illegal gun sales were occurring, or when concealed weapons permits were being fraudulently being applied for with a city hall address? Did Gregory call the Feds? Or where by the attempted cover up of the Chief Russell Leach case. Where many at City Hall used their personal cell phones for communication whereby could not be subpoenaed, therefore did not exist. The question everyone is asking is why does Gregory want to beat everybody up?

Afternoon session, not in attendance was Tom Boyd, and again Councilman Steve Adams and Chief Financial Officer Paul Sundeen. The second day of the two month audit must be tumultuous. The Council Arena didn’t really get heated until the Chief of Police Sergio Diaz stepped in and began pointing fingers and speaking out at those those he didn’t like. Pointing and looking at Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzello he exclaimed, “I don’ t like her”, and pointed to others with signs, “and any of them”. Looked back at Pitruzello, “you said I wasn’t qualified”. Ok, it is a public forum, but we weren’t sure if the good ol chief was acting in police mode or in private citizen mode. Then he faced off with Activist Karen Wright, not once but twice, he left and then came back and he wouldn’t stop. “You’re a horrible person”, “Your disrespectful” and the coup de ta “You hate the police”! Ooops.. Assistant Chief Chris Vicino even appeared to be trying to get the chiefs attention for the unchiefly behavior, “Hey Chief”! “Chief”! Many around were asking who the man in the suit was. “He’s the chief of police”… “What, you’re kidding”? Well when I came up to Karen, she was visually shaken as many in the room were at this display. She of course did not know how to respond to the Chief, and she said she didn’t ever meant any disrespect to fallen officer Ryan Bonaminio or his family, as she indicated. Besides the chief, there were others who verbally attacked her. Have we forgotten what this country is all about? Is Riverside a microcosm of beliefs predating 2012? Have we forgotten what our forefathers warned us about? Afterall they were considered Kooks and Traitors. Questions many are secretly asking about our Chief, if he has the ability or is he truly qualified with the skills to create a unifying and cohesive support and alliance between the police and the community? Will the chief receive a letter from Gregory regarding his behavior at City Council Meetings as many others have for less of the behavior seen? A Strategic Plan submitted to the council two years to late and nothing said regarding the lateness from the mayor or city council? Do any of them care when the whole community is watching? What message does this send to our community from our leaders?

In Public comment, Kevin Dawson stated that the comments the Chief made were not in line with the preamble of the city charter. We want people to participate in city government. I’ve heard of other incidents where similar comments were made and I think they were inappropriate, and not in line with a leadership role. People look at the Chief for guidance.. Kevin also mentioned since the chief is in a leadership role, that maybe the City Manager should have a conversation with him, and I think he owes Karen Wright an apology. Both current City Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police were brought in by Former City Manager Brad Hudson, whereby much of his activities have been in question.

NOT SURE WHERE THE CHIEF GETS HIS POLITICS ON SPEECH, BUT NEEDS TO READ THIS, I’M SURE HE PASSES IT DAILY..

Self appointed auditor, Vivian Moreno stated that one of things that the chief discussed in his description of his strategic plan was the enthusiasm and professionalism of the police department, there was nothing professional about the way he accosted Karen Wright when she was exercising her right to free speech. You have a monument on City Hall and there is a quote of Benjamin Franklin that talks about free speech. I’m sure that everyone would agree that everyone has the right to free speech. Our we all civilized in this room except the Chief? He also said that they (police) were a force of good. I don’t think what he had to say was good for her,(Karen Wright). He also stated something really interesting, he stated that the police don’t lie, cheat or steal.. There was $35,000.00 that was given to Connie Leach (former wife of chief Russ Leach) for the Multi Cultural Youth Festival from Police Asset Forfeiture, what about that? There was the receipts from the the Baker to Las Vegas Run for hotels, shoes, luches, dinners, what about that? …and Gregory Priamos, police asset forfeiture will now collect money from a poor woman (Ms. Doreen Johnson), you are now going to take her property because she rented it to someone undesirable.. I think there is no leadership in management, and I think there are a lot of problems with this city council and you better wake up!

OTHERS SUCH AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PAUL SUNDEEN, WHO WAS BROUGHT OUT FROM RETIREMENT, TO BE EMPLOYED ON A PART TIME BASIS WITH THE CITY OF RIVERIDE, ACCORDING TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS IS CONSIDERED NULL AND VOID. CURRENTLY, SUNDEEN WAS PLACED ON CONTRACT. THE QUESTION PERCOLATING IS CAN HE EVEN BE PLACED ON CONTRACT TO CONTINUE WORKING FOR THE CITY?

DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP WEBSITE A THREAT? VIRAL INFESTED? CAME ACROSS THE FOLLOWING: “WEB SITES RATED “CAUTION” MAY HAVE A SMALL NUMBER OF THREATS AND ANNOYANCES, BUT ARE NOT CONSIDERED DANGEROUS ENOUGH TO WARRANT A RED “WARNING”. PROCEED WITH CAUTION”. IS THIS A MESSAGE TO COMMUNITY BUSINESS’S REGARDING THE LEGACY OF DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP?

UPDATE: 3:00 PM CITY COUNCIL: PUBLIC SPEAKER REBECCA LUDWIG PASSESS 3 MINUTE MARK, ALMOST GETS A POLICE ESCORT OUT OF COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE CALL, POSSIBLY CITY ATTORNEY GREGORY PRIAMOS. IT APPEARS THAT MAYOR PRO TEMPT PAUL DAVIS LOOKED AT PRIAMOS, THEN TWO POLICE OFFICERS WALKED DOWN THE HALL WAY. DOES PRIAMOS HAVE A POLICE BUTTON UNDER HIS TABLE?

TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… WE WILL HAVE TO ASK GREG ABOUT THAT ONE… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT OR FOR CONTACT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

THIRTY MILES OF CORRUPTION AND CONCERNED CITIZENS WILL OCCUPY CITY HALL IN SUPPORT OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONTROLLER’S AUDIT OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS. EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

TUESDAY, MARCH 6TH, 2012

8:00 AM – 3:00 PM: GENERAL ASSEMBLY

3:00 PM- COUNCIL CHAMBER

6:30 PM- COUNCIL CHAMBER

IT TAKES A WHOLE COMMUNITY TO CLEANSE CORRUPTION… TAKE BACK RIVERSIDE!

CBS ALSO MENTIONED BRAD HUDSON HAS YET TO RETURN THEIR PHONE CALL REGARDING THIS ISSUE, REGARDLESS, CBS REPORTER MENTIONED THEY WILL BRING HIM BACK IN THE NEWS IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS WHEN HE RELEASES HIS BUDGET ALLOCATIONS.

Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna said he asked Hudson to consider reimbursing the county for those costs – which seemed reasonable, given that Hudson makes close to $500,000 a year in county salary and retirement benefits from his last job. Hudson declined to do so, Serna said.

HUDSON’S PAST DISCRETIONARY SPENDING IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE

2005-2006: $39,296,019.06

2006-2007: $45,091,052.92

2007-2008: $37,691,038.33

2008-2009: $26,918,067.27

2009-2010: $29,554,005.19

TOTAL $178,550,182.77

2010-2011 $830,762.24

The total discretionary spending under Former City Manager Brad Hudson was $178,550,182.77. Under Hudson, he could spend up to the maximum of $50,000.00 without City Council approval. Prior to Hudson’s hire, in 2004, the maximum amount that could be spent without council approval was $25,000.00. In June 2010, Mayoral Candidate Dvonne Pitruzzello asked the question regarding an accounting of the city manager’s discretionary spending. This is what we found. What it was spent on is all together another story, but it also appeared that that the discretionary fund had not been reviewed by city council. But coincidently since Pitruzzelo’s June 2011 request the amount spent from discretionary spending decreased dramatically. Since June 2010 Hudson’s approved contract spending under $50,000.00 now went down to $830,762.24 Brad Hudson began looking for another position in February 2011, and left August 2011 to his new position in Sacramento leaving questions regarding his spending and why he left. The records attained were the result of a public records act request.

UNLIKE RIVERSIDE, IT DIDN’T TAKE LONG FOR SACRAMENTO TO FIGURE BRAD OUT… THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN PLACED IN POSITIONS OF POWER, FOR THEY DO NOT BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AT LARGE WITH REGARDS TO THEIR ACTIONS AND DECISIONS..

UNKNOWINGLY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE, KEEP CONNECTED WITH TMC, RATED RIVERSIDE’S MOST “SLANDEROUS” AND MEZZSPELLED, “MISSPELLED” AND “OPINIONATED” BLOG SITE! TMC IS NOW EXCLUSIVELY ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE’S DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, AND PROSSIBLY POSSIBLY ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE’S POTENTIAL SLAPP SUIT LIST… AGAIN, THANK-YOU COMMUNITY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE EMPLOYEE’S FOR YOUR SUPPORT! COMMENTS ALWAYS WELCOMED, ESPECIALLY SPELL CHECKERS! EMAIL ANONYMOUSLY WITH YOUR DIRT! THIRTYMILESCORRUPTION@HOTMAIL.COM

WHO WILL BE HIDING BEHIND THE COMPUTER NEXT WHEN THE AUDITOR COMES ASKING QUESTIONS? CHECK BACK WEEKLY…THAT IS, EVERY CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY! WE’LL EVEN PROVIDE THE DIRECT LINK SO YOU CAN CHECK THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. CALL YOUR LOCAL ELECTED COUNCIL PERSON AND THE MAYOR AND REQUEST THAT A FORENSIC AUDIT BE DONE BY STATE CONTROLLER JOHN CHIANG OF THE CITY HALL BOOKS. IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE, THE NUMBERS WILL ALWAYS COME UP RIGHT!

MAKE SURE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, AS REQUESTING A 100K INCREASE FROM 50K FOR A PAYOUT TO THE LAW FIRM CIHIGOYENETCH, GROSSBERG & CLOUSE THAT BRAD HIRED TO INVESTIGATE HIMSELF. “ABSOLUTELY SILLY!” AS ONE CITY MANAGER STATED ABOUT THE CLAIMS OF AN ASSISTANT DEPUTY ATTORNEY, THOUGH I DO AGREE WITH THE CITY MANAGER THIS TIME ON THE FOLLOWING ISSUE, (ITEM 41). NOT TO FORGET THE REISSUANCE OF THE MEASURE C BALLOT (LIBRARY SERVICE TAX) INITIATIVE FOR A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE (ITEM 17). THEN THERE IS RIVERSIDE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECTED COST OF 36 MILLION. AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE CREATIVE FINANCING THAT WE ARE SEEING WITH THE FOX THEATRE/PARKING GARAGE EXPANSION. TAKE A LOOK AT FISCAL IMPACT. YOU KNEW BRAD WAS GOING TO GET THIS ONE OUT BEFORE HE LEAVES (ITEM 12, 3:00PM SESSION).

The leasing schemes only represent smoke from a small brush fire. The really, really big wildfire is in redevelopment. The Council just dumped another 56 million gallons of gasoline on the wildfire last night. And the taxpayer is locked into a burning house…with no way out. -Nomo Taxes, Commenter from the PE

RIVERSIDE CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECT APPROVED AT THE COST OF $36 MILLION. (ITEM 12). THE 6 MILLION OF THAT COST WILL IS COMING FROM REDEVELOPMENT FUNDS DUE TO THE CREATIVE MERGING OF DOWNTOWN/AIRPORT-HUNTER PARK/NORTHSIDE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA. THE $30 MILLION WILL BE RAISED BY THE ISSUANCE OF DEBT BY THE GENERAL FUND. THIS WILL BE DONE IN EITER OF TWO WAYS, 1. THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (COP) OR, 2. A BANK LOAN SIMILAR TO THE ONE UTILIZED TO FINANCE THE FOX ENTERTAINMENT PLAZA.

ON JUNE 29, 2011 GOVERNOR BROWN SUSPENDED ALL REDEVELOPMENT ACITIVITIES IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THE OPTIONS TO THIS SUSPENSION FOR CITIES AFTER THAT DATE IS TO DISSOLVE IT OR CONTINUE IT. BECAUSE OF THE ABUSES OF REDEVELOPMENT AND YOU CHOOSE TO CONTINUE, THE PAPERWORK THE STATE EXPECTS TO FILL OUT IS TEDIOUS, AND HAS UPSET MOST CITY GOVERNMENTS AS OURS. SO YOU HAVE BEHAVIOR SUCH AS THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE CALLING THE “OBLIGATION PAYMENT” A FORM A RANSOM. THE CITY ISSUED AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE THE VOLUNTARY REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. THE CHOICE OF A VOLUNTARY PROGRAM IS MORE OF A STRUCTURED PROGRAM TO MAKE THE CITY BECOME MORE RESPONSIBLE, WITH THE STATE’S VIEW THAT IT WILL MITIGATE ABUSE OF FUNDS. THE PARTY WAS OVER IN RIVERCITY. BUT THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE DID NOT TAKE THIS SUSPENSION WELL, CALLING IT “RANSOM”, KICKING AND SCREAMING TO THE EXTENT THAT THE LEAGUE OF CITIES (MAYOR IS PART OF) AND THE REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE STATE. THE SUSPENSION WAS IN LIEU OF REDEVELOPMENT FAILING TO DO WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED FOR, TACKLING URBAN BLIGHT.(ITEM 13).

SO COME ONE, COME ALL! THE USUAL SUSPECTS WILL ALL BE IN ATTENDANCE!

UPDATE: 07/26/2011: RIVERSIDE POLICE OFFICER SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM’S COMPLAINT AGAINST THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE IS AS FOLLOWS: Complaint+07-19-11“PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT I DON’T THINK EXIST, I THINK PEOPLE ARE READING PERFECTLY INNOCENT THINGS AS SOMETHING SINISTER.” WELL, YOU MAY BE RIGHT MIKE, BUT WOULDN’T THIS BE A GREAT VENUE FOR SUPERIOR COURT THEATRE? THAT’S WHERE THE LIGHTS SHOULD BE, NOT THE FOX THEATRE! SERGENT VALMONT GRAHAM VS. THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, NO HOLDS BARRED! I’LL PAY $60.00 A SEAT FOR THAT ONE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE GREAT CITY CAST OF CHARACTERS, DESANTIS, HUDSON AND CHIEF DIAZ! MAYBE WE COULD EVEN GET EX-CHIEF LEACH TO ROLL IN ON RIMS TO MAKE A SURPRISE CAMEO APPEARANCE! BUT YOU KNOW THE CITY WILL MAKE IT RAIN ON THIS MUSICAL, AND SEE IT IN THERE BEST INTEREST, NOT THE TAX PAYERS, TO PAYOUT A GILLION DOLLARS JUST TO MAKE IT GO AWAY.

UPDATE:07/28/2011: ALABAMA’S JEFFERSON COUNTY’S BANCRUPTCY WOULD TOP 4.1 BILLION. THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE 3.14 BILLION OF THAT HAS BEEN CONNECTED TO SEWER DEBT, A DEBT THAT THE COUNTY CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO PAY! IT WAS FOUND THAT THE SEWER UPGRADES WERE FINANCED WITH RISKY TRANSACTIONS SHOWN LATER TO BE LACED WITH BRIBES AND INFLUENCE-PEDDLING.

Rate this:

In times when the community are losing trust in government, losing their homes, having difficulty maintaining the stability of their families, losing their jobs and even having difficulty placing food on the table, Police Chief Steven Stavely is a refreshing force of hope for those who have lost trust in public servants. He is what leaders are made of, one of integrity and one in which the community of the City of Riverside should direly seek out.

Here is why. It’s very clear to me that there is no fiscal crisis in the City of Costa Mesa. The majority of the council has created budget gaps in order to affect or create the appearance of a fiscal crisis. They have pushed finance and the budget process around to get the kind of numbers that benefit their position. They have in essence lied as theycreate the appearance of crisis in order to appear as the white knight to a narrow band of political followers. They have done this, I believe, because they have a political need to layoff police officers. This is completely unethical and immoral behavior and I will have no part in it.

Don’t blame a bird because it chirps and fly’s and don’t blame a union because it represents the needs of the employees. If you give those unions more authority over management rights, and let them engage in anything beyond pay and benefits then that is the hallmark of leadership failure. If your arguments are so weak that you cannot achieve success in that engagement then the shame is yours not the unions. That is the case here in Costa Mesa in my view and the council is covering itself with lots of shame.

Over the years, I have had city councils I thought were smart and thoughtful and ones who were less skilled. In every case, I know they were trying to do the right thing – I did not always agree, but clearly they were trying hard to improve the communities we all served. I have never, however, seen a council such as this one. They lack skill, training, education, knowledge, they fail to study (or at least learn). The majority either lies or are so lacking in the necessary skills that they actually believe the junk they say. They act as if they are owners of the business that is the municipal government of the City of Costa Mesa, but they are not, they are merely trustees of these public assets both human and physical and they fail in that role completely. They are in my opinion incompetent, unskilled and unethical.

I say that they (council majority) are destroying this police department with their incompetence and that means only one thing. The community building efforts that this department has invested in for many years will stop and the community will begin to deteriorate.

I will say that in the end, this period of turmoil will subside and be replaced with opportunity. If there is not too much damage the department and community can, with time, effort and energy, survive and grow its services again. I caution that each of you should keep your eyes open. When that happens I know for a fact that you will handle yourselves professionally, as you always do. While such circumstance will be hard to take, there is a positive side it – will prevent Costa Mesa from following straight to Bell which is exactly where it is currently headed.